From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, adobriyan@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Migration of kernel interfaces to seq_files breaks pread() consumers
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 18:19:24 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090124181924.d633523c.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0901162229420.12858@kitami.corp.google.com>
On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 23:51:35 -0800 (PST) Paul Turner <pjt@google.com> wrote:
>
> (Specifically) Several interfaces under /proc have been migrated to use
> seq_files. This was previously observed to be a problem with VMware's
> reading of /proc/uptime. We're now running into the same problem on
> /proc/<pid>/stat; we have many consumers performing preads on this
> interface which break under new kernels.
>
> Reverting these migrations presents other problems and doesn't scale with
> everyones' pet dependencies over an abi that's been
> broken :(
We changed userspace-visible behaviour and broke real applications.
This is a serious matter. So serious in fact that your report has
languished without reply for a week.
Reverting those changes until we have a suitable reimplementation which
doesn't bust userspace is 100% justifiable.
In which kernel versions is this regression present?
What would a revert look like? Big and ugly or small and simple? Do
the original commits (which were they?) still revert OK?
> Part of the problem in implementing pread in seq_files is that we don't
> know know whether the read was issued by pread(2) or read(2). It's not
> nice to shoehorn this information down the stack. I've attached a
> skeleton patch which shows one way we could push it up (although something
> like a second f_pos would be necessary to make it maintain pread
> semantics against reads).
>
> One advantage of this style of approach is that it doesn't break on
> partial record reads. But it's a little gross at the same time.
>
Yes, that is a bit gross.
Does this patch actually 100% solve the problem, or is it a precursor
to some other fix or what? It's hard to comment sensibly if it's a
partial thing with no sign how it will be used.
> diff --git a/fs/read_write.c b/fs/read_write.c
> index 2fc2980..744094a 100644
> --- a/fs/read_write.c
> +++ b/fs/read_write.c
> @@ -407,6 +407,16 @@ asmlinkage ssize_t sys_pread64(unsigned int fd, char __user *buf,
> ret = -ESPIPE;
> if (file->f_mode & FMODE_PREAD)
> ret = vfs_read(file, buf, count, &pos);
> + else if (file->f_mode & FMODE_SEQ_FILE) {
> + /*
> + * We break the pread semantic and actually make it
> + * seek, this prevents inconsistent record reads across
> + * boundaries.
> + */
> + vfs_llseek(file, pos, SEEK_SET);
> + ret = vfs_read(file, buf, count, &pos);
> + file_pos_write(file, pos);
> + }
Well yes, that's a userspace-visible wrong change too.
> fput_light(file, fput_needed);
> }
>
> diff --git a/fs/seq_file.c b/fs/seq_file.c
> index 3f54dbd..f8c5379 100644
> --- a/fs/seq_file.c
> +++ b/fs/seq_file.c
> @@ -50,6 +50,8 @@ int seq_open(struct file *file, const struct seq_operations *op)
>
> /* SEQ files support lseek, but not pread/pwrite */
> file->f_mode &= ~(FMODE_PREAD | FMODE_PWRITE);
> + file->f_mode |= FMODE_SEQ_FILE;
> +
> return 0;
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(seq_open);
> diff --git a/include/linux/fs.h b/include/linux/fs.h
> index 5f7b912..c3b5916 100644
> --- a/include/linux/fs.h
> +++ b/include/linux/fs.h
> @@ -76,6 +76,8 @@ extern int dir_notify_enable;
> behavior for cross-node execution/opening_for_writing of files */
> #define FMODE_EXEC 16
>
> +#define FMODE_SEQ_FILE_PREAD 32
-EWONTCOMPILE, btw.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-25 2:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-17 7:51 Migration of kernel interfaces to seq_files breaks pread() consumers Paul Turner
2009-01-25 2:19 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2009-01-25 3:40 ` Paul Turner
2009-01-25 12:08 ` Alexey Dobriyan
2009-01-27 21:47 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-01-27 21:48 ` [PATCH 1/2] seq_file: Move traverse so it can be used from seq_read Eric W. Biederman
2009-01-27 21:49 ` [PATCH 2/2] seq_file: Properly cope with pread Eric W. Biederman
2009-01-30 1:26 ` Migration of kernel interfaces to seq_files breaks pread() consumers Paul Turner
2009-01-30 3:01 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-01-30 6:09 ` Paul Turner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090124181924.d633523c.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox